Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1887-09-26
THE BELL TELEPHONE.
The Government Suit Brought Against
the Company In Boston Disnllssed-.
ODimiOn Of Judge Colt.

BOsrON, Sept. 26--In the United States Court In
tanning the demurrer OF the Bell Telephone Co.
against the Government suit, and the case was
dismissed.
Colt, who stated that the main purpose OF the I'LL
was TO cancel two patents granted to Bell relating
10 act Of Transmitting speech by electricity the
bin contained numerous allegations the most I'M
pOrtant OF which were that
BELL WAS NOT THE FIRST INVENTOR
or the speaking Telephone; that Philip Refs of
Germany, and others had, previous to his inyen-
lion, perfected an apparatus for Transmission OF
sseca by electricity ,e The prayer Of The ol was
and have been since the date OF sealing and deiy-
cry null and void: that they were wrongfuiy pro
cured TO be issued by means OF fraud on the part
OF Bell, and that the American Bell Telephone Co
may be perpetually enjOined from setting up any
right or claim under said letters of patent, The
court says:
THE GOVERNMENT NO POWER TO BRING THE BILL
''That the first and principal question raised by
this demurrer Is whether ia the absence of any
specific statute the United States by direction OF
the Attorney General can maintain bill in equity
TO cancel patent Tor an Invention. The question
Is 10y no means free from difficulty, and the deci-
sion OF the courts in the few where the point
ton wee a 81 a
considered decision OF Judge Shipley, OF this
circuit, In Attorney General VS. Stamford
effect that the Government, In the absence OF an
express statement, has no power to bring b II in
equity 10 cancel patent, Is sound and should be
followed by this conrt IN this case. Our whole
patent system rests upon a constitutional pro-
vision and the statutes passed by Congress"
EXAMINATION As TO PATENTS
The Judge then proceeds to q careful examina-
ton OF the constitution and acts OF Congress and
to the decision OF cases bearing upon such acts
and articles OF the constitution and arrived at the
conclusion that Congress could have provided
that the Government should have the riYht 10
bring suit TO cancel patent for an invention, on
the ground OF fraud, but congress has not seen mt
TO incorporate such provision into the patent
laws and that ID Sufficient answer TO this bill.
We think, therefore, that the history OF patent
legislation under the Constitution tend TO show
that Congress never Intended this power to be ex-
ercised under the present law"
ment to cancel patent for an invention exists, it
must be Dy implication, and must spring from the
general principles OF equity jurisprudence and he
here DISCUSSES the history and character OF this
power and the procedure under It in England.
The power to cancel patent in England he
stated, was In the nature Of royal prerOgatiye
and the proceeding was by writ OF scire Jacta.
CoNCLUsIoN.
After going into an elaborate discussion of the
authorities cited by counsel, he concludes as fol-
lows:
.'The main grounds on which the validity OF the
Bell patents are attacked IN this bill can be
section 1920 OF the Revised Statutes Of the
The necessity which might possibly arise in
some cases for the exercise OF this power by the
government seems to be wantin. in this case.
The question OF power raised by the dill is an Inn.
portanr one and in view OF the con-
niev Of se,. Authority the can ony be @e
1t is our duty In the present CASE unless clearly
satisfied That Judge Shipley was wrong, to follow
the Law established In this circuit In the most
subject. The demurrer to the bill is sustained
and the bill dismissed.